1c. Final Plat, Heritage Square Addition I le
CITY of
I ..
CHANHASSEN
1 \N1/4,111,/, 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
° (612) 937-1900
4
MEMORANDUM , ,,s,
1 TO: Don Ashworth, City Mana e / nr'°t
IIFROM: Barbara Dacy, City Planner Q`'`
DATE: June 23, 1988
ISUBJ: Final Plat Approval - Heritage Square Addition (PUD 87-1)
IBACKGROUND
The City Council approved the PUD amendment and preliminary plat
I for the above referenced project on June 13, 1988, subject to
eleven conditions:
1 . A detailed utility plan showing water, sewer, and stormsewer
I connections as well as fire hydrant locations shall be sub-
mitted and approved by the City Engineer prior to building
permit issuance.
I2 . A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted indicating the
additional plantings to be located between Chan View and the
parking area.
I3 . A pedestrian walkway shall be provided on the site in con-
junction with the development plans for the retail projects
Ito be developed to the south and east of the parcel.
4 . Detailed facia and signage plans shall be submitted for
I Planning Commission and City Council final review prior to
building permit issuance.
5 . Removal of the existing single family residence shall be
Iaccomplished prior to building permit issuance.
6 . Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted prior to building
Ipermit issuance.
7 . All parking areas shall be lined with concrete curbing.
I8 . Compliance with the comments as noted in the Building
Department memorandum dated May 25 , 1988 .
I
II
Mr. Don Ashworth
June 23 , 1988
Page 2 1
9 . Compliance with the comments in the letter from BRW dated
May 25 , 1988, specifically, #6-#11 on pages 1 and 2 and #1 on
page 3 .
10 . Compliance with comments as noted in the Fire Department memo 1
dated May 27, 1988 .
11. Items referred to in BRW' s letter be specifically spelled out
regarding storm sewer.
ANALYSIS
The final plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat.
Condition #1 required submission of a detailed utility plan pro-
viding water, sewer and stormsewer information. Because this has
not been submitted as of this time, the city does not have a
basis to retain any necessary drainage and utility easements that
should be shown on the final plat. Therefore, the plat should
not be signed until a detailed plan has been approved by the City
Engineer. Further, all necessary documents regarding the deve-
lopment need to be executed with the HRA prior to signature of
the final plat mylars.
The remainder of the conditions will be handled either by staff
prior to building permit issuance or as in the case of Condition
#4 detailed facia and signage plans must be submitted for
Planning Commission and City Council final review prior to
building permit issuance.
Condition #5 reads that the Rettler building should be removed
prior to building permit issuance. Given the applicant' s
construction schedule, the city may not be able to accomplish
demolition prior to building permit. Therefore, staff would like
to change the condition to read " . . . prior to occupancy permit
issuance" . 1
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the final plat 1
stamped "Received June 13 , 1988" subject to the following con-
ditions:
1 . Execution of the development contract and submission of any 1
necessary financial securities .
2 . A detailed utility plan showing water, sewer and stormsewer 1
connections as well as fire hydrant locations shall be sub-
mitted and approved by the City Engineer . If drainage and
utility easements are determined to be necessary, they shall
be so indicated on the final plat prior to signature by the
city.
1
I
' Mr. Don Ashworth
June 23, 1988
Page 3
' 3 . Compliance with the conditions of the preliminary plat appro-
val except for the above noted change regarding the Rettler
building.
' ATTACHMENTS
1 . City Council minutes dated June 13 , 1988 .
2 . Final plat stamped "Received June 13 , 1988" .
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
i
I
I
6City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988
Mayor Hamilton: There's some confusion on that issue and that's what we're
trying to clarify I think. That's the reason for the tabling I believe.
Councilman Horn: That's part of it. The other part is finding out what current
sign sizes we have in this city because if we're way out of line than we should
change our ordinance.
Councilman Johnson: Roman, the 80 square foot sign you currently have, is there
a possibility that some other station, is the same sign used nationwide? I mean
you're not going to eat that sign and just let it sit in the warehouse. I'm
sure you'll find use for it.
Roman Mueller: I'm down to three stores in the State of Minnesota right now.
That's it. This is one of them. The other one is in Mankato and the other one
is downtown St. Paul.
Councilman Johnson: Could they use an 80 square foot sign in either of those? '
Roman Mueller: St Paul I have three faces on two sides for a total 6 faces and
each one of them is well over 80 square feet. The other one is in Mankato and
that's getting a 10 by 13 sign. Right now we're just going to adjust the
placement of it with the City. Could I use it? Potentially yes. At what time
I don't know.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT FOR A 60 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING ON PROPERTY
LOCATED SOUTH AND ADJACENT TO CHAN VIEW, HERITAGE PARK APARTMENT PARTNERS.
Mayor Hamilton: We also tabled item 3 to go along with this item.
Barbara Dacy: The Planning Commission recommended approval of this item. One
of the major issues of discussion at the Planning Commission meeting was the
traffic issue and those concerns were voiced from people that live in the
neighborhood to the north of the proposed site. The concerns were about ,
regarding the removal of the stop signs at West 78th Street and Great Plains
Blvd. and as we noted in the staff update, we know that the Council is well
aware of MnDot's position on traffic control along this stretch. We put a note : II
that this only confirms that the City's intent to try and realign TH 101 as soon
as possible and get the north/south traffic out of downtown and on it's own
realigned roadway. In a nutshell, this overhead reflects the original building
location and building configuration on the site. What is now proposed is more
of an "L" shape building which is located on the site approximately 70 feet now
further south of the lot line to the existing 2 1/2 story apartment building but
it is 10 feet closer to the west lot line. The applicant has submitted a good
landscaping plan to maximize so that the yard areas around the building is
providing for good yard space. The Planning Commission also adopted the
previous conditions of approval that were imposed during the 1987 review as
well. I know that the Council is concerned about the design and exterior
quality of the building. I now see that the architect is here for the applicant
that could probably better address those questions.
Brad Johnson: I thought maybe first of all we could review the process that
we're going through to get everything in order since we did change them around a
46
. ._
' City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988
•II
If little bit. You have before you two decisions to make. One is the inducement
resolution for the bonds that we plan on using to finance that and that's the
part that you tabled. Inducement resolution will allow us to use housing
II revenue bonds to finance the project and those of course have no on-going direct
obligation other than to the project for payment. In addition to that, as you
also have before you a housing plan, the city has no updated plans. Is that
right Barb? We had to redo the housing plan as a part of our condition for the
I bond so that's also in there. I think both of those are somewhat formalities in
bonding processes. The second thing is that we've been asked, we formed a new
partnership to own the project and we were asked by that partnership to redesign
I the building to fit with what they perceive is a better plan and design. That's
what we're submitting to you. It's been approved by the Planning Commission
with their recommendation. We've had basically no neighborhood, we had a
meeting on our own with the neighbors and the Planning Commission meeting and in
II 'both cases their only concern was 78th Street intersection so you guys can take
care of that on item 19. I'd like to introduce Tom Zumwalde who is the
architect for the project and then back in the corner is Jay Weiss. He
I ;represents Weiss Construction who will be a general partner in the project.
,Tom Zumwalde: I understand there were some questions or comments concerning the
elevations. Let me first tell you why we're going through this process. Brad
Imentioned...and what we found is we did some marketing ...Maxwell of Minneapolis
and also got some input from the contractor in terms of cost and both of those
were important factors in taking another look at the design and configuration.
The original building was kind of a question mark shape with a lot of angles in
it and what happened as a result of that is you end up with a lot of pie shaped
,units with minimal exterior wall and a very wide space in the inside of the
building. Marketing felt that was not very desirable. It also a lot of pie
I shaped rooms. Another thing was wherever you hit one of those angles you have
some real severe structural problems. It's very costly so we looked at those
and we looked at the costs that it would take to accomplish that and could that
I money be better spent elsewhere in the building? Looked at a new design and a
new design that is virtually the same square footage as the original. I think
it's perhaps 200 square feet bigger. Something like that but almost identical.
I The same height. The same unit count. Everything. The big difference is that
the average unit size increases 24 square feet. The units are much more
marketable. The building is fully sprinkled now. The units have washers and
II dryers in them. A lot of amenities that we weren't or would not have been able
to originally offer in the program. Those are basically the reasons why we've
taken another look at it. In terms of the exterior, we're looking at pretty
much the same pallet of materials that we were looking at originally. Certainly
I the same type of character. The original building was a combination of brick
and horizontal lap siding. What we're looking at on the proposed building and
unfortunatley I don't have it colored for you but I think you can see pretty
II much the configuration. Again, we've got brick and we've got a series of two
different types of lap siding breaking at the third level. You can see the
darker divider. We also have balconies in all of the units now versus the
original proposal which had either balconies or bay windows. The balconies will
Iproject from the facades of the building so they break up what is perceived now
as a longer plan and I think will be successful in bringing down the sale of the
building. We had the tower initially. We've maintained that element. That's
II still the focal point of the building. That's pretty much it I guess.
Mayor Hamilton: I think Bill had some concerns about the construction of
I47
I
8City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988
materials.
Councilman Boyt: Let me deal with probably one of my bigger concerns.
Soundproofing that's going into it. I would assume that this is probably built
as a typical apartment is built and that's not soundproof enough.
Tom Zumwalde: The guidelines for an apartment building are party walls...which '
are standard. You find that pretty much in...housing. Apartments. It doesn't
matter. It's kind of an industry standard. There are ways of increasing it
slightly but again the cost of it is considerable to do that. - We're certainly
going to meet all the standards. There's no question about that.
Councilman Boyt: Tll me what this rating of 50 blocks in terms of sound
intensity. Does it block my neighbor's bass from their stereo? '
Tom Zumwalde: Probably not.
Councilman Boyt: One of the things, when we take 60 people and we put them
toybther and if this was your apartment building without city assistance, this
would be an interest of mine but it wouldn't be as concern but the City is
becoming involved in this and as such, I think one of the things that we could
do is we can say to people, there are 60 people living in here but once you get
inside your doors, you're a unit. You're not bombarded by people from the
outside. That makes your place very attractive and I think that it's worth the
possibility of say for instance double sheet rocking which is fairly inexpensive
really since you're only putting a finishing coat on the outside surface.
Tom Zumwalde: Let me explain it a little further. Party walls that you have to
use in an apartment project have to have tests run on them... Double layer of
drywall is certainly one of them... What we can do if you have something
specific in mind in terms of an STC. ..
Councilman Boyt: It's been a while since I've seen those ratings so the general
idea is let's block stereos for instance. I know that a total block is I
completely unrealistic but we can probably block 90% of it and so I'd like to
see your work on that and with the prospect that we're going to go above the
industry norm for an apartment building. The other concern I had was really
more a maintenance of the exterior. I recognize this is certainly a cost factor
but what is going to something like an all brick do to your cost? You currently
have about a third brick now and the rest of it is lap siding.
Tom Zumwalde: It increases it. Perhaps Jay could address that.
Councilman Boyt: Give it to me over like 30 years. When we consider
maintenance of the lap siding versus the brick.
Jay Weiss: There are maintenance costs incurred. However, as a reserve it is
set up manually that we pay for those expenses of exterior maintenance so that'a
requirement of the lender to have a reserve set up so without it the dollars sit
there and just accumulate. This program better uses the dollars for the
intended use. I never looked at 30 years to be honest. We can only give square
[!!
foot costs in terms of installation.
48
' City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988
9
Councilman Boyt: I look at the apartment buildings that are there by the
'^ railroad tracks off of TH 101. Don't those have brick exterior and we don't
have any city money in that building do we? So I think there is an advantage in
having an exterior that's going to last at least 30 years or longer and it would
' be nice to know how much that's really going to cost us in terms of rent.
Eventually all these things get reflected back into rent and I think we have a
lever from the public money standpoint that we wouldn't normally have.
' Mayor Hamilton: I think you also need to consider who's going to, what market
are they attempting to reach for people to be in there and the more you continue
,to add in such as brick which is very expensive, if you're going to require
;that, than you to continue to cut out the bottom level of people who can afford
to be in there. If the City is going to be, as you say involved in the funding
of this through tax increment financing, it would seem to me that we may want to
have as broad a base as possible. People who can afford to rent in this
building.
' Councilman Boyt: Yes, I agree with you and it's my understanding that there are
'410 units that we're providing for senior citizens or how many units Brad for
;senior citizens?
Brad Johnson: This building is designed for 24. It's an adult building and the
target market is over 55 years old. We also set it up so that 24 of the units
have been set aside for low to moderate income at the expense of the developer.
That's the kind of building. We can not do an FHA building that's specifically
for seniors so if we can target the rent to seniors initially. Their concern is
we don't build it for seniors than what do you do? We don't have a true senior
building where you've got a ruling senior, they just don't do that right now.
They used to do it.
Mayor Hamilton: So are your rents flexible enough so as the cost of this
' building continues to go up, the people who are going to be able to rent in here
will remain the same?
' Brad Johnson: The problem that we have is we can put an all brick exterior on
this and we're already capped on our rent. That does not increase the rent. In
other words, the lenders say you can rent this for so much in Chanhassen but the
amenity package and the exterior package does not increase the rents. They take
out the dishwashers too...so washers and dryers and things that we're putting
inside the building but things on the outside do not. We added another
$60,000.00 worth of exterior, there's no way that we could be reimbursed for
that building cost. The money that the City is assisting this project, I might
also say the building was previously approved as the same type of siding it has.
Wood and brick. The money that the City is assisting this project on is going
to directly to the tenants. Not the developer. In other words, we're going to
develop, how we're doing it is that the other issue is the tax exempt nature of
our clients and by providing 24 units for low and moderate income qualifies us
' to offer this at about 2% lower interest rate. We have an agreement with the
City that the money that they give us in assistance, that we've requested will
be repaid to the City in addition to all of this so that's how it works. The
additional funds that have to go back in the district, the agreements that are
involved. The first agreement had to do with additional land. The second one
the City is advancing us approximately an additional $40,000.00 a year of tax
revenue that will pay for this and that will be used then to basically subsidize
' 49
. .,.
. y Council Meeting - June 13, 1988
those 24 tenants. However, the developer is required also to pay back those
funds over a 12 year period.
I!!
Don Ashworth: I was just going to basically say the same thing. Maybe just a
slight twist on it. The performer that the HRA looked at in establish a subsidy
level considered two portions. One to the developer and one to the units
themselves. Set up to try to turn this and reduce the number of years. The
subsidy level right now turns positive in the 6th year or from the 6th to the
7th year. The total agreement though is written over a 12 year package. We
have been pushing for the performer to maintain that 6th to 7th year position.
Additional costs that we may put into the project, what that will do is keep the
project from turning positive to the 7th, 8th, 9th year. In other words, reduce
the monies that Brad was talking about that would be repaid to the City so there
is some benefit to us in not pushing through additional costs. I'm not saying
that we shouldn't look for the best materials and the best project. I'm just
saying, you can not look at those as though they're dollars that they're just
simply going to absorb. We probably will absorb them.
Councilman Boyt: I think that if we're looking at 12 years here and then
basically, as I understand it, the building is
like any other apartment ng privately owned. It's operated
y partment building. Is that correct? And I'd like to think that
we have a building that's going to be standing and as pretty as it looks like
it's going to be today, 20 to 30 years from now. There's certainly plenty of
examples of buildings that are of this nature so that's why I'm a little
concerned about a wood construction exterior.
Tom Zumwalde: I know what you're saying about brick. ..it's a major, major cost.
If you look around at a lot of what I consider newer luxury developments around
town, they are for the most part wood sided. It's not a cheap, chinsey material
and this is... I think to put the brick on it would push it way into the
cadillac realm and that's really out of the realm of. .. '
Councilman Boyt: I've got just a couple of questions and then I'll stop. There
are 24 units that are low to moderate income. There are, I saw the figure 5
units that are handicap accessible?
Tom Zumwalde: Three units.
Councilman Boyt: Isn't that set by the size of the building? Okay, well I II
would think that it's well worth the City's money to improve the sound barrier.
That just makes it a better place and it's not all that much more expensive and
I will give up on the brick.
Councilman Horn: No comments.
Councilman Geving: I think this is certainly something we've been wanting in
Chanhassen for a long time to increase our housing base with a major complex
such as this. I'm certainly all for it. I'd like to know a little bit more
about where this lies in relationship to Chan View. How much further back from
Chan View is this location now than it was previously? I'm quite surprised that
we didn't get a lot of homeowner input on this but apparently it's also the fact
that we have a buffer there now. tom: already have apartments on those corners
and people are used to them and I don't think that they feel this is a threat.
It's actually a major improvement. How many feet would you say that would be?
50
. City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988
'Tom Zumwalde: The original proposal was approximately, almost the same distance
from Chan View.
Barbara Dacy: It met the setback in the front which is 25 feet off of than
View.
' Councilman Geving: Then the street will be lined up with Huron. The street I
live on so I could come right into the apartment complex when I get to be 55 and
ready to occupy it. I'd like to know are these units, are these units that are
' going to be sold? Strictly a rental arrangement. Strictly rental and you are
marketing for an age group in the 55 seniors, let's say rather than young
married with children?
Brad Johnson: Yes. The building has been basically designed as an adult
building. One bedroom, den. One bedroom and then two bedroom Swingle units
which means they've got a living room in the middle and a bedroom and a bath off
of two, each bedroom and a bath are off on either side. Generally speaking
those types of units are designed more for adults. One or two adults living in
I won't say that we won't get a lot of children but we've got quite a few
' and there's nothing wrong with that. It's just the building isn't limited to
that. The other thing is that we've got quite a bit of new units that are
coming abroad that are more designed for families. Two bedrooms. Three
bedrooms in different configurations. Young families don't tend to like to have
their children not next door to them.
Councilman Geving: Brad have you thought of any security measures in the
parking areas? Is there going to be a parking garage for each of the units?
Will there be a security type of arrangement that you'll have there?
' Brad Johnson: There will be a push button operator for each person to get into
the garage. It's a fully secured building. You just can't get in.
' Councilman Geving: Okay, so you thought about all those angles.
Brad Johnson: What we're trying to do is fulfill, we've listened with the
neighborhood over in that area and they would like to see this, at least one of
these types of buildings go in put in there.
Councilman Geving: Let me ask you a question about your landscaping. I don't
' see too much about the landscaping plan or what I would see as I drive down
Huron and look at this facility. What kind of shrubery? How's it going to look
to the viewer?
Tom Zumwalde: Through your ordinance you require so many trees planted around
the perimeter of the site and that was volunteered. A fair amount of buffer
type of. .. As you get out here along Chan View, there is berming along this
side and again the trees every so far with a shrub lining. Then again a
perimeter landing along this side. We'll have to develop that patio area in
here and ultimate connect it to trails...
Councilman Geving: What about the recreational facilities? Is there anything
in the building itself designed for the residents?
51
City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 '
Tom Zumwalde: Yes, in this corner of the building there's 3,000 square feet on
the first floor that is a party room, community kitchen, bathroom.
Councilman Geving: Where they could put on an open house type thing? And
there's a kitchen in there?
Tom Zumwalde: Yes. ,
Councilman Geving: Just another quick question. What are one of these units
going to cost to be when I get to be 55 and want to move into it a single unit.
Brad Johnson: Let clarify that. Through the City participation we're setting
aside 24 units that will go to low to moderate income which means that the
people living in that unit will have to or 60% of the median income for a single
or family. That's in the range of $12,000.00 to $16,000.00 a year and they can
spend a certain percentage of that money for their income. That's just for the
24 units. We've also set that aside primarily for the senior citizens. That's
the 55 and older group. If we can't find that group in town, than we have to
rent it to everybody else. The other 36 units are open to all adults at our
market rate and our rate of rental runs something like $350.00 at the low end
and up to $675.00. Now the units themselves we can not, this is another rule,
we can not take a two bedroom unit and not rent it as a subsidized unit.
There's no special units. It's just the individual. Each unit will have it's
own thing and we'll have a base rent period. If a person qualifies for a unit,
there's no, it's not like a Section 8 housing or something like that where we've
got a certain kind unit. We'll basically have the same kind of units available
to everybody.
Councilman Geving: That's the kind of questions I'm getting from the residents
in the community now. How much does it cost? What are they going to look like?
What are the amenities? I'm hoping that you'll be providing the newspapers,
we've got all the papers represented here tonight, with that kind of
information.
Brad Johnson: We've got to go through this process first.
Councilman Geving: You'll get it. One other question since you did indicate
that you're going to have balconies, are those going to be cement balconies or
are they going to be wood? We had a big problem over in Eagan I believe with a
fire on the balconies and that kind of thing. What are the balconies going to
look like?
Tom Zumwalde: In fact I was reading the Minutes from last year. They are wood.
The construction of the building above the garage is wood frame and the '
balconies will also be wood. As I recall in the Minutes last year, I believe
the City has an ordinance...
Councilman Johnson: I don't have a lot of questions on this. I see where
Bill's coming from. I can't support you right now Bill on this because I can't
get a grasp. I don't know what that cost differential is. From where they're
coming from the standard building thing going up to the next step and how much
noise reduction you get with that next step. If you said the base noise there's
not much that stops it. My neighbor who lives 200 feet, more than 200 feet away
from me, his base goes blasting through my walls and I've got extra sized walls '
52
City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 1 3
and everything. I see where you're coming from but in this case we don't have
enough information to go with. I can't put something on here that's going to
kill this project. I think this project's important to the City and potential
cost increased to this project, like you say a double layer drywall, when you
start talking 60 rooms, you're talking a lot of money. I'm not sure if you're
going to have a significant increase. I think apartment management can control
sound in an apartment. Just like the apartments I used to live in in Texas, it
' took the management to do it. There was nothing I could do about it. We had a
rock and roll group four apartments down. There was nothing I could do about
them as far as construction wise. Otherwise, I see this as a benefit to the
' City.
Mayor Hamilton: When you build your walls, I guess just to follow up on what
Bill's saying, are they 2 x 6, 2 x 8 construction? Do you do a single wall for
two sides or do you actually build 2 x 6 walls?
Tom Zumwalde: Typical would be a 2 x 4 stud with same. ..on one side and 5/8ths
' on the other side for sound insulation. There are 6 plate 2 x 4 studs
staggered on that plate. .. There are a whole variety of them. Some of them
(increase the fire rating more than they increase the sound deadening so I would
' have to go back to the book and look at... The increase in sound deadening
isn't that great even in a really significant wall. It only goes up to perhaps
55... It costs more to do it than you realize.
I Mayor Hamilton: I know some of them do a double wall which I would think would
improve it a lot or go through a 2 x 6 wall so you get additional insulation in
there would help I would think.
Brad Johnson: I guess the best thing is there has been a tremendous increase,
since many of you live in apartments, in apartment sound proofing and if anybody
' is really interested we have one that was built to this spec that is currently
being rented if you want to go visit one, we'd be more than happy to buy you
lunch and drag you over there. It's in St. Louis Park and it's basically the
same standards as this building. It's designed for seniors.
' Councilman Boyt: I think this is an issue that if there's a way that we can put
a condition on this that leaves the issue open so we can look at the cost trade-
off, quiet is the most thing we can buy anywhere. This is an opportunity to
build some more into the building if it's at all economically justifiable. I
just think to make that decision without the chance to examine is to miss an
opportunity and I'd like to see us create a window so we can look closer.
' Mayor Hamilton: I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you. Is quiet the
most expensive thing we can buy or the most precious?
' Councilman Geving made a motion to approve the PUD amendment as presented by
staff and Mayor Hamilton seconded the motion.
' Councilman Boyt: What about adding something on the sound? I don't know
exactly how to word that but do we need. ..
Barbara Dacy: What they were discussing is that condition 4 requires that the
facia plan come back. If you wanted to add something in that condition to
address the sound proof issue.
53
14ty Council Meeting - June 13; 1988
•
Mayor Hamilton: You'll get another shot at that review of their building plans
specifically.
Councilman Geving: We'll see that again so we won't have to include it tonight.
You understand what we're trying to do so come back to us with that.
Councilman Geving moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to approve PUD Amendment
Request #87-1 subject to the plans stamped "Received May 12, 1988" and the
following conditions: '
1. A detailed utility plan showing water, sewer and stormwater connections as
well as fire hydrant locations shall be submitted and approved by the City
' Engineer prior to building permit issuance.
2. ' A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted indicating the additional
,plantings to be located between Chan View and the parking area.
3. IA pedestrian walkway shall be provided on the site in conjunction with the
'development plans for the retail projects to be developed to the south and
east of the parcel.
4. Detailed facia and signage plans shall be submitted for Planning Commission
'and City Council final review prior to building permit issuance.
5. 'Removal of the existing single family residence shall be accomplished prior
to building permit issuance.
6. Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted prior to building permit
issuance.
7. All parking areas shall be lined with concrete curbing.
8. Compliance with the comments as noted in the Building Department memorandum '
dated May 25, 1988.
9. Compliance with the comments in the letter from BRW dated May 25, 1988,
specifically #6-#11 on pages 1 and 2 and #1 on page 3.
10. Compliance with comments as noted in the Fire Department memo dated May 27,
1988.
11. Items referred to in BRW's letter be specifically spelled out regarding
storm sewer.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PROPOSED HOUSING PLAN AND PROGRAM.
Resolution #88-58: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve
the Housing Revenue Bond Program and Housing Plan for construction of the
Chanhassen Heritage Square Apartment Complex. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
54